Need a little help figuring something out

[83hurstguy]

I realized that I never really buttoned up the rest of my shock install and final tuning for street driving experience with the ridetech TQ coil over shock install.

This is what my final installed setup ended up like:



Front
ridetech TQ Triple Adjustable 3.6" stroke shock with 600# 8" Spring and Ridetech LCA

Rear
Ridetech TQ Triple Adjustable 6.9" stroke shock with 162# 12" Spring

Hey Lance, a couple pages back (Post #217) you had mentioned the front was a 600# 10" spring. Could you verify which length you are running? Considering calling ridetech soon, was reading through your thread again over lunch.

[SSLance]

Luke, looking back through my notes I have here at work, I am 95% sure the fronts are 8" springs...but I'll check for certain when I get home tonight.

[SSLance]

Alright, I know now why I was confused...the first set ridetech sent (the 700# springs) were 8" long... The 600# springs in the car now are 10" long.

[83hurstguy]

Alright, I know now why I was confused...the first set ridetech sent (the 700# springs) were 8" long... The 600# springs in the car now are 10" long.

Makes sense. Thank you!

[Ron Sutton]

Alright, I know now why I was confused...the first set ridetech sent (the 700# springs) were 8" long... The 600# springs in the car now are 10" long.

Hey Lance, to refresh your memory .... that is what I requested from ridetech.

When most guys go 700# ... an 8" tall spring works great. I requested a spring 100# softer than they normally run, for our higher front suspension travel goals.

The challenge then can be getting the car to sit at ride height. So I requested 10" long springs, knowing you'd need to preload them a bit to get them on, but we would end up with ...
a. the optimum spring rate for our goals.
b. the ride height you wanted & needed
c. No spring bind

They sent you exactly what I ordered and it worked out just like we planned.

----------------------------------------------------------------

On another note,

I am not surprised at how well the car handles & competes in AutoX now. I knew that valving we created for you would make the front end a mean corner carver. The valving is perfectly matched to the spring & bar rate combination to achieve the travel, roll angle and tie down I was seeking for your combination.

Frankly, what I am surprised at ... pleasantly surprised at ... is how well it rides on the street with only a few knob adjustments. That is incredible & a testament to the control and tunability range of the Ridetech Triple Adjustable shocks.

You now have race car handling with clicks of the shock ... and great street ride when you put the clicks back. That is the best of both worlds.

[83hurstguy]

Thanks for the details. I'm considering ordering single adjustable coilovers and the ridetech lower control arm to go with my SC&C Stage 2 package (Howe tall ball joints) that are already installed. However, my fender height is at 25-1/4" (I believe Lance's car is at 26-1/4"), and I really don't want to raise it more than 1/4" as I like the stance.

Is there adjustment room on the coilover to lower the car an inch with the 10"-600 lb/in springs? I'm assuming you'd need 0.7" or so of threads on the shock body. If not, I'd probably have to go to a shorter 8" spring, which means I'll probably have to increase the spring rate due to reduced travel.

The alternative is to leave my Eibach springs in with existing lower control arms, and just add the ridetech smooth body HQ (single adj) shocks.

[Ron Sutton]

Thanks for the details. I'm considering ordering single adjustable coilovers and the ridetech lower control arm to go with my SC&C Stage 2 package (Howe tall ball joints) that are already installed. However, my fender height is at 25-1/4" (I believe Lance's car is at 26-1/4"), and I really don't want to raise it more than 1/4" as I like the stance.

Is there adjustment room on the coilover to lower the car an inch with the 10"-600 lb/in springs? I'm assuming you'd need 0.7" or so of threads on the shock body. If not, I'd probably have to go to a shorter 8" spring, which means I'll probably have to increase the spring rate due to reduced travel.

The alternative is to leave my Eibach springs in with existing lower control arms, and just add the ridetech smooth body HQ (single adj) shocks.

Hey Luke,

When we started to work together, I proposed a higher travel set-up for Lance ... and he wanted to utilize the higher travel/low roll angle suspension set-up I had been discussing. His car, was at the same ride height as yours is now ... and looked cool ... but didn't have enough travel. So we raised the car to where it is now to allow the front suspension travel we needed, as I have done a few times before with good results.

I'm sure you can get the car to sit at the current height you have it at with Ridetech shocks and it will perform better. Just know it will not handle & perform like Lance's SS, because you will have about half the front suspension travel, which is a one of the major keys to why Lance's set-up handles so well.

[SSLance]

Here is the only picture I have of the bottom spring adjuster on my front shocks.



This was taken not long after I put it all together and I believe I have turned the adjuster up two more turns since then to get it at the height it sits at now. This shows there should be plenty of room to get the ride height you want with a 10" spring Luke.

[83hurstguy]

Thanks once again, Ron and Lance. Appreciate the quick responses and details.

Ron, I've been slowly working my way through your suspension threads on lat-g, understand the high travel/low roll concept better now.

The nice part with the coilovers is being able to adjust ride height as desired (or as necessary for performance). I also need to talk to Mark at SC&C to see how much SPC lowers would increase my bump travel while retaining traditional coil springs. They drop the spring pocket at least 1/2". Leaning towards the coilovers if the budget allows.

[Ron Sutton]

Thanks once again, Ron and Lance. Appreciate the quick responses and details.

Ron, I've been slowly working my way through your suspension threads on lat-g, understand the high travel/low roll concept better now.

The nice part with the coilovers is being able to adjust ride height as desired (or as necessary for performance). I also need to talk to Mark at SC&C to see how much SPC lowers would increase my bump travel while retaining traditional coil springs. They drop the spring pocket at least 1/2". Leaning towards the coilovers if the budget allows.

I am a fan of the coil overs, for sure. If you go the ridetech route, we could install the same digressive valving in the front shocks that Lance has, which is a key reason it turns so well in the middle of the corners, when other cars are tight/pushy.

[83hurstguy]

I am a fan of the coil overs, for sure. If you go the ridetech route, we could install the same digressive valving in the front shocks that Lance has, which is a key reason it turns so well in the middle of the corners, when other cars are tight/pushy.

Thanks Ron. I probably shouldn't keep highjacking Lance's thread here, though this question may be pertinent to others interested. Looking at the budget, I'd be limited to single adjustable coilovers this year. The triple adjustables nearly double the price over the singles. What are your thoughts on having the singles vs waiting a year or more to swing the triples?

[Ron Sutton]

Thanks Ron. I probably shouldn't keep highjacking Lance's thread here, though this question may be pertinent to others interested. Looking at the budget, I'd be limited to single adjustable coilovers this year. The triple adjustables nearly double the price over the singles. What are your thoughts on having the singles vs waiting a year or more to swing the triples?

Hmmm. Good question.

I have raced a lot of series that only allowed us single adjustable shocks (as a cost control measure). We always choose rebound adjustable shocks of course. The reasoning is this:
* You can "tune" the compression of the suspension with springs.
* You can not tune the rebound of the suspension with springs.
* So if going single adjustable ... rebound adjustable shocks are the clear choice.

In racing, if the suspension is compressing too quickly, we simply change to a 25# stiffer spring ... and vice versa if too slow. But again, utilizing the adjustable rebound valving to control the extension of the shocks is major.

Double or triple adjustable shocks are preferred ... when budget is not an issue ... because you can adjust on the shock instead of changing a spring (to a degree). And, you can "fine tune" the compression rate in between spring rates.

So, Double or triple adjustable shocks are "nice" if you can afford them. Single adjustable shocks will achieve 80% of what you need to tune. Me? I'd buy the singles and rock on now. Your call.

[SSLance]

Ever since the first time I tried to do a "performance" alignment on my car, I ran into an issue getting all of the negative camber I wanted because my upper control arm bolts weren't long enough. Yesterday I remedied that situation.

Here's what the passenger side looked like with 0.6 degrees of negative camber...



See the back bolt there has no threads sticking out of the nut...we even took the washer out between the nut and the control arm to get every last bit we could out of it.

I took the control arm loose and used a C-clamp to press the bolt out of the frame. Here is the factory bolt and it's new replacement side by side. The new bolt is a class 10.9 12mm x 1.75 70mm long, about 15mm longer than the stock bolt.



The rest of the parts for the day



I had the inner fenders out because of my body bushing swap project so I figured it was the easiest time to do this as well but I'm not ready to do a new alignment at the time, so my plan was to just put shims back in place to set the alignment back where it was for now.

I put the bolts in the frame and then ran nuts down and snugged the bolts up tight. I ordered bolts fully threaded because I wanted to be able to use nuts to hold the bolts in place. I then put a couple of washers on the bolts and a shim or two to get the thickness that matched the stack of shims I took out.



It took some finagling to get everything in place as I had to hold the UCA in place (still attached to the spindle), run the bolts in, start the nuts and run them down as they drew the bolts through the cross bar. The cross bar would not go over the bolts once they there bolted to the frame first due to the headers.

Lots of thread available now for any adjustment I might need...



Snugged up tight



Before I put the inner fenders back in, I went ahead and did the driver side as well. I've never ran out of threads on this side, but figured just in case...might as well do it now.



On the back bolt, there weren't enough shims to make up the thickness of the nut so I left it out. When it comes time to align it like it needs to be, if there is room then for a nut I'll put one in.

[Ron Sutton]

Looking Good Lance.

Now that you have solid body mounts & more UCA adjustability ... what's next ?

[SSLance]

Pretty much ever since I have had this Quick Performance 9" rear axle, I have fought the passenger side axle seal (or the lack thereof) leaking rear end gear oil. QP uses a Moser Billet Torino style (big Ford) axle end and Moser axles with sealed bearings pressed on them. Their thought is the sealed bearing will stop the gear oil from leaking...it doesn't.

I finally learned that there is a step down inside the end that a National part #473229 seal fits into so I picked a couple of them up last week. Here is what the axle end looks like.



and here is what it looks like with the seal pressed into place.



ID of the seal is 1.5" which matches the axle. Sure hope it works...

I cleaned a LOT of leaked gear oil up today. And I just LOVE the smell of gear oil.

Also put a new E-brake cable on the passenger side and test drove the car.



Everything feels pretty good but it was hard to make a comparison with those old stock size tires on the car, need to get my new rims cleaned up and sealed and some new rubber on them then really take it for a shake down run.

[SSLance]

Now that you have solid body mounts & more UCA adjustability ... what's next ?

Well... The test drive went okay, glad the car is back down on all fours again. First time I've driven it on stock sized rubber in a while though, that was entertaining!!!

I think I'm about ready to four corner scale the car and see if the springs need any adjusting... Then I'll get my Joe's Racing camber\caster tool out and work on the alignment a bit more. Should one of those be done before the other? Or does it not really matter.

I won't have my new tires on my aluminum rims for a while yet, so I plan on doing both with my stock tires on since they are all four the same size. The tires I have on my aluminum rims are staggered in both width and height and the new tires will be the same on all four. Still working my way around what's best to do there in the meantime.

I know I'll be able to adjust (fine tune) the alignment specs after I get my new tires in and mounted, but not sure if I'll still have scales available then.

Once the four corner weights and alignment is set, then all I have left to do is some interior add ons, a good cleaning, and a nut and bolt check on everything again and I'll be ready for race season to start.

[SSLance]

Last weekend I adjusted my front end alignment, bolted my aluminum rims and good street rubber (for now) to the car and did some extensive test driving on the street. I had an interference issue with the drive shaft loop I had to correct right away, a light raise in body height and a 2 degree lowering of the pinion angle was the cause and a couple of washers used to space the loop down was the cure.

I put a bit too much static camber in the car and the steering got pretty heavy. Was surprised how that camber added more of a heavy feel than the large amounts of caster I have added before.

I went from -0.6 camber \ +9.25 caster to -1.6 camber \ +8.75 caster

When I get back under the car I'm going to pull a shim from each of the front UCA bolts and try to take the same amount of camber out of each side while increasing the caster to try to get it back over +9.00 degrees.

The car drives real well, is vibration free, and it just felt good to be behind the wheel of it again. I stuck my GoPro under the front and checked out the frame flex under some side to side cuts made at about 45-50 mph and here are the results.





So it looks like to me from this video that with just the new PolyGraphite #1 bushings clamped down tight, the frame doesn't want to slip back and forth under the bushings like with the old wore out rubber bushings...it just kind of tilts side to side just a bit.

Those were some pretty hard cuts back and forth at about 45-50 mph. Not really the total force that the frame will see under an extreme autocross corner, but probably close.

If the top of the frame is secure against the core support and not moving side to side and the bottom of the frame is moving just ever so slightly, that has to drastically correct the steering input feel during cornering.

I'm wondering how a beefier brace designed such as the Speedtech brace or the SC&C brace would help in tightening up the little bit of frame twist still evident (or if it should even be a concern to me right now)?

[AutoX_a_Truck?]

I am a fan of the coil overs, for sure. If you go the ridetech route, we could install the same digressive valving in the front shocks that Lance has, which is a key reason it turns so well in the middle of the corners, when other cars are tight/pushy.

Hi Ron, I sent you a PM, but I am not sure if it went through but I also see you are busy starting a business. I have ridetech Triple Adjustable Coilovers on my Scout II, which uses a modified S10 front suspension somewhat similar to a g-body. I have aftermarket control arms and other components, but obviously my S10 based setup is currently less than ideal compared to some of the other high dollar stuff out there. When building my hot rod most of the parts and design fell into place based on what was available or what fit. My Dad and I recently mapped out the front suspension, which revealed slight differences side to side, probably from factory tolerances and 30 years of abuse. Anyway, without further hijacking this great thread, I have had a heck of a time trying to eliminate push in the middle of corners, particularly tight autoX corners. This thread inspired me and gave me hope that I might be able to wring quite a bit more out of my budget setup.

[SSLance]

Tyler, how much does your front suspension travel under hard braking? Is it more of a typical stiff spring autocross setup or a high travel\ low roll setup like we are steering my car towards?

I know it sits pretty low in grid, but never watched it close enough on the track to see how far it travels.

[Ron Sutton]

If the top of the frame is secure against the core support and not moving side to side and the bottom of the frame is moving just ever so slightly, that has to drastically correct the steering input feel during cornering.

I'm wondering how a beefier brace designed such as the Speedtech brace or the SC&C brace would help in tightening up the little bit of frame twist still evident (or if it should even be a concern to me right now)?

As you know, even full frame cars are flexi-flyers without additional support & bracing. I say "as you know" because you saw how much the frame sagged in the front when lifted on a 2-post lift.

Chassis rigidity plays such a big role in performance. You definitely want to improve it where you can. The challenge becomes:
a. Finding products that work well. (like your bushings made a huge diff)
b. Or, making them (like braces, reinforcement items, etc.)
c. Not adding a ton of weight in the process.

I think the Speedtech is 1.5" tubing & the SC&C is 1.25". I'd lean towards the stiffer version .